Group value

In dealing with an appeal against the refusal of retrospective planning permission and listed building consent for alterations to a house in Tyneside (DCS Number 400-020-918) an inspector has corrected a couple of common misconceptions.

The inspector acknowledged that the list description was a single entry comprising multiple properties. She explained, however, that “List entries of this kind were a short-hand method allowing a number of buildings with very similar characteristics to be included on the statutory list without the unnecessary duplication of a separate entry for each one. This does not diminish the significance of No 51 as a heritage asset in its own right. It is therefore not possible to infer, as the appellants suggest, that the effect of the appeal scheme should be judged proportionately against the total number of buildings named in the list entry.”

The inspector also noted the appellants’ assertion that it could be seen from the list description that the significance of the heritage asset was described in relation to the frontage features. Again, however, she explained that “..buildings are listed in their entirety. The earlier list descriptions tend to be brief, and it is not uncommon for them to mention only the features of the front elevations, primarily for identification purposes. They are by no means exhaustive records of the significant features of individual assets. Therefore, no inference may be made by the omission of, for example, descriptions of interiors, or other parts of listed buildings.”

The inspector considered that the rendering and replacement doors and windows constituted inappropriate features that were inconsistent with the architectural character of the building, concluding that the harm to the heritage asset was unacceptable.

A "net health gain" principle should be embedded in national planning policy to ensure that new developments do not contribute to the problem of air pollution, a report by government agency Public Health England has recommended.

The government's Airports National Policy Statement (ANPS), which sets the policy framework for the expansion of Heathrow airport, should be "set aside and reconsidered" if it is found to be legally flawed, the High Court has been told on the first day of a legal challenge against the airport's expansion.

Plans have been approved for 1,500 homes on an employment site in Salford Quays, including a tower of up to 46 storeys, after officers concluded the development would not compromise neighbouring employment uses.

Plans have been approved for a mixed-use scheme with over 1,100 homes on a site currently used as a retail park off London's Old Kent Road, after planners concluded that the scheme's negative impacts, including the loss of retail space, would be compensated for by "major regeneration benefits".

The government has said it will "robustly defend" itself against a legal challenge which is seeking to have the approval for the expansion of Heathrow airport sent back to Parliament for reconsideration, as the case opens at the High Court today.

The High Court has upheld an inspector's ruling that the size of an area of hard-standing at a fencing company's yard in Surrey was so far in excess of what was required by a building on the site as to render it not ancillary to the building.